Teaching+Argumentative+Writing+through+Debate+-+Joe+Conner

Article Summary Developing "Real-World Intelligence": Teaching Argumentative Writing through Debate by Randi Dickson Joe Conner South Central Kansas Writing Project July 20, 2006

Randi Dickson, author of Developing "Real-World Intelligence": Teaching Argumentative Writing through Debate, has been an English teacher as well as worked at the University level. She uses debate to teach argumentative writing in her English classes. She subscribes to Peter Elbow and Tom Romanos argument that "expository writing that explains and argues is more important and more mature than narrative or imaginative writing that simply renders experience." This article discusses how she structures these debates and provides rationale for using debate to teach argumentative writing methods.

Why teach argument? In learning about argument and preparing debates students develop critical thinking skills such as the ability to consider different views, form and defend a viewpoint, and consider and respond to counter arguments. Argumentation and debate are critical components of democracy. Research shows that argument is the most significant strategy for developing higher order thinking skills. No other kind of thinking matters more than forming and holding beliefs, making judgments, and considering opposing views when making decisions in ones life.

Writing for real purposes and writing for varied and multiple audiences are two important goals of effective writing instruction. Dickson uses these two goals to teach argument in conjunction with class debates. Through writing debates students read a variety of text for understanding, write for real purposes, develop listening skills, and develop skills for public speaking. This encompasses a variety of strands of language arts.

In preparation for debates and arguments students need to be engaged in substantial prewriting activities that will allow them get to know their subject and enrich their knowledge base. Dickson uses a two step process to teach argument and debate. The first step is to involve the students in a fishbowl setting in which an inner circle of students model the debate process with teacher control. In this process the subject is chosen for the students. Capital Punishment and the right to die are two favorites of the authors. The students are given about a week to acquaint themselves with the topic beginning with video exploring the history of the subject. They see how public opinion is persuaded. They are then supplied articles for students to study to further their knowledge of the subject. This might also serve as a time to let the librarian introduce the students to the library.

After the students have a sufficient informed opinion the structure of argument is introduced. Although Dickson would not strictly adhere to one process she is inclined to use Sheridan Baker's //The Practical Stylist//. This would involve using a "keyhole approach" to writing essays. This process involved working from an opening into a thesis statement. The body would contain a concession statement to the opinion of the opposition then move into their argument with supporting evidence from the video and the research that they conducted.

In discussing the pedagogy used to teach argumentation Dickson sites a study by Stuart S. Yeh entitled "Empowering Education: Teaching argumentative Writing to Cultural Minority Middle School Students." In this study is it noted that one needs to recognize that even though patterns exist in the way an essay is structured there are still variations on the structure that can lead to a successful product. One should not subscribe strictly to formulaic writing practices. However these practices can and are used successfully in real world settings. Yeh's study also suggested that the use of heuristics (teaching of models) is valuable to increase development and voice. This study used an experimental group consisting of students taught using two heuristics. This group showed a gain in development and voice. Teaching of models is beneficial provided we are not too strict with their use.

After structuring the essays the class moves into the revision phase. Drafts are read aloud to the class and in small groups to provide feedback to the writer. Before turning in the final drafts the papers are proofread for correctness by a peer editor.

The second step in teaching argument is the debate process. To begin four "pro" and four "con" papers are selected for debate based on the variety of argument on the topic that they have been assigned. These two groups then revise their papers together so that they do not repeat arguments in preparation for the debate. The rest of the class has and alternate assignment. A podium is borrowed and the debates are conducted. All students not involved in the debate take notes and become involved due to the fact they have written and researched the topics as well. They find themselves on the edge of their seats knowing they will soon get their chance to discuss their side with the entire class after the debate.

In the next round of debates the students come in with ideas for topics to debate. The topics are placed on the board and culled for "debatability." Depending on class size three to four subjects are chosen and groups formed around those. Students then chose which side they will argue on. They spend a couple of weeks in the library conducting research. Two weeks is given for the debates to take place. Everyone in the class not participating in the debate becomes the audience. Sometimes the debate is taken to other classes or even other schools. For example the eighth grade debate class may travel to the college to debate in front of a college sociology class.

In conclusion Dickson discusses the bigger picture. The importance should not be placed on who won the debate rather on what was accomplished in the process. Students often ask who won the debate. At this time Dickson responds "we all did." Emphasis is placed on what was learned not what happened. It is not about "winning" but rather "making considered decisions about complex subjects" that matter.